In this book it seems like we get a little information about a lot of characters, but not a lot of information about any of them. There are nearly no physical descriptions, but we seem to get a pretty good picture of how each character’s mind operates. Even the plot sometimes is disjointed, so naturally we make a lot of inferences to fill in the gaps. I know I am guilty of picturing characters with certain color hair, and picturing their farm even though I don’t get a description of it. Is it fair to make all of these inferences? I even made an inference that Addie was a bad mother. I think it was Gass that talked about only taking what the author gave you, don’t create things in your mind that aren’t on the page. With a book like this, is it even possible to do that. There are situations like DeweyDell going into the basement with the “doctor.” It isn’t spelled out what happens, should we not theorize then about what we think happened? There are a lot of gaps in this book because of the jumping from character to character. Is it possible to go through the book and not make at least one inference? - adi-c Feb 28, 2008
I think it would be impossible not to infer something about a novel--especially one that is so vague. For instance, at first it wasn't made entirely clear that Dewey Dell was pregnant, but we all knew she was because of little clues that pointed to that. A lot of times, novels step around subjects that are unsavory and I think that is impossible not to infer some things. The author doesn't want to come out right and say it, but they leave hints expecting that the reader will see where it's going. Also, I think that although Gass doesn't think that we should care what the characters look like and that it's all about the story, not the characters, it's hard to not read something, especially something like this that involves you deeply in each person's thoughts, and not start to form an image of them in your mind. It seems that in reading, a lot of inferences are needed to hold it all together--if a book is full of gaps, what else can you do? - dru-c Feb 28, 2008
There are certain things that the author is almost begging you to infer and that Gas will probably approve you of inferring. For example, as you have stated above the fact that the "doctor" took advantage of Dewey Dell can be inferred from the fact that when he first meets her the doctor is already commenting on how beautiful she looks and the fact that he even had to take her down to the basement anyways to finish with the "procedure". The hints dropped that infer this event to happening gaurantee that the author wanted the reader to infer what was about to happen. What Gas does not want is for us to infer that something has happened when the author has said absolutly nothing about it (such as being given abosultly no physical descriptions and imagining exactly what the characters look like). Those types of things Gass thinks takes away from the overall meaning of the novel which is to find the meaning in the characters which are proper nouns that represent what the author is trying to tell us. - DGr-c
I completely did not realize that Faulkner did not describe the character's appearances. From the beginning I gave them certain characteristics even though they were never presented to us. I agree with all of your thoughts that it is impossible to not infer when reading a book. Half the time I will say, "Oh, so that description of the tree is significant because..." and then my teacher will give me a strange look because the tree has no importance whatsoever. I think as readers we have been taught to "read between the lines." An author may not give us all of the information we need so we take it upon ourselves to find the missing pieces. Many times this is a good strategy to have because we are able to see different aspects of the book. But other times the author did not mean for us to infer any further than the print on the page.
I can understand where Gass is coming from in that he doesn't want us adding in details that aren't there, but it is very difficult to do when we are told to analyze every situation. It is also difficult to not picture a character the way we want them because our imaginations run wild with ideas all of the time. You can't stop our imagination! - szd-c Feb 28, 2008
I know that I am guilty of making assumptions in this book. I know that we weren't given even as much as a hair color about the characters, but I assumed them to all be African American. Not in a racist way, mind you, but simply because the American Girl Doll I wanted when I was little was named Addie, and she was African American (it's a silly reason, I know... for the record, I never did get that American Girl doll from Santa.)
I think Gass doesn't want us inferring things like this, so he makes the rule that we shouldn't infer at all. But, part of me feels that Faulkner wrote this novel vaguely for exactly that purpose - so we would infer things. Dewey Dell's pregnancy, for example, was pretty much spelled out for us, but never exactly stated. That we can infer, though. I'm not sure about the situation in the basement with the doctor. There is a lot of evidence, but I don't know if it's exactly fool-proof, and maybe we shouldn't be making that assumption at all because we don't get enough information. - mmi-c Feb 28, 2008
Gass's advice like any others has to be taken in reference to the situation at hand. Certainly imaging a character's appearance is not overly important in this novel, but it may be in another, just like inferring Dewey Dell's pregnancy, Jewel's illegitimacy, and Dewey Dell's rape would be important parts of As I Lay Dying. By Faulkner basically directly saying that these occurred, it isn't so much inferring though as it is just filling in the gaps, gaps that were Faulkner's intent to be filled. Here I think is where Gass comes in. He doesn't want to us imagine events that did not occur or try to create a history for the character that doesn't exist. He doesn't want us to go the route of fan fiction. Following Faulkner's intent, though, it is necessary that we catch on to what he is inferring to appreciate all the nuances of As I Lay Dying. When we understand that Jewel was the love child of Addie and the minister, his height is explained, Addie's love for him is explained, and many other things. If you didn't catch that Dewey Dell was pregnant in the beginning, her entire reason behind the trip to Jefferson and ensuing rape would also escape you. There is a difference between understanding what the author has not directly stated and creating new material all your own that is not based on the written word. - AHa-c Feb 28, 2008
I thought you phrased that nicely, DGr, that in some cases the author is almost begging us to make our own inferences. It's true. We have to draw conclusions and make assumptions that the author leaves out, if it's necessary to our grasp on the novel, as long as it doesn't deter us from the true message of the book. However, I think there's a reason why Faulkner did not give physical descriptions right off the bat like many other authors do. Faulkner did not want us to get caught up with images. We are so accustomed to identifying people by a face. One of the very first things that we do when we meet a new person is put a place in our brain for a name and a matching face. Faulkner probably did not want us to do that. My feeling is that he wanted us to match a name with a certain mindset and opinion, what they contributed to Addie's and the family's story, which for this novel's purposes was more important. - AGe-c Feb 28, 2008
It would be unrealistic to say that you can't fill in the gaps in the story, and I don't know anyone who doesn't get some kind of mental picture of what is going on in a book, even if some of the information is missing and has to be filled in. I think that is what makes every book a different experience for different people. I think that Faulkner did want us to focus more on the characters, and the way that they interacted with, and thought about each other, and this may be why sometimes the detail seems to be lacking, because he wants us to know that the importance of the book is not in the details. When a book tells me all about someone or something I feel like the little things are of some importance, and look really closely at them to find out what the importance is. Because the little details weren't extreamly important I think that Faulkner left them up to our own imagination to fill them in. - jko-c Feb 28, 2008
-
I think it would be impossible not to infer something about a novel--especially one that is so vague. For instance, at first it wasn't made entirely clear that Dewey Dell was pregnant, but we all knew she was because of little clues that pointed to that. A lot of times, novels step around subjects that are unsavory and I think that is impossible not to infer some things. The author doesn't want to come out right and say it, but they leave hints expecting that the reader will see where it's going. Also, I think that although Gass doesn't think that we should care what the characters look like and that it's all about the story, not the characters, it's hard to not read something, especially something like this that involves you deeply in each person's thoughts, and not start to form an image of them in your mind. It seems that in reading, a lot of inferences are needed to hold it all together--if a book is full of gaps, what else can you do? -
There are certain things that the author is almost begging you to infer and that Gas will probably approve you of inferring. For example, as you have stated above the fact that the "doctor" took advantage of Dewey Dell can be inferred from the fact that when he first meets her the doctor is already commenting on how beautiful she looks and the fact that he even had to take her down to the basement anyways to finish with the "procedure". The hints dropped that infer this event to happening gaurantee that the author wanted the reader to infer what was about to happen. What Gas does not want is for us to infer that something has happened when the author has said absolutly nothing about it (such as being given abosultly no physical descriptions and imagining exactly what the characters look like). Those types of things Gass thinks takes away from the overall meaning of the novel which is to find the meaning in the characters which are proper nouns that represent what the author is trying to tell us.
-
I completely did not realize that Faulkner did not describe the character's appearances. From the beginning I gave them certain characteristics even though they were never presented to us. I agree with all of your thoughts that it is impossible to not infer when reading a book. Half the time I will say, "Oh, so that description of the tree is significant because..." and then my teacher will give me a strange look because the tree has no importance whatsoever. I think as readers we have been taught to "read between the lines." An author may not give us all of the information we need so we take it upon ourselves to find the missing pieces. Many times this is a good strategy to have because we are able to see different aspects of the book. But other times the author did not mean for us to infer any further than the print on the page.
I can understand where Gass is coming from in that he doesn't want us adding in details that aren't there, but it is very difficult to do when we are told to analyze every situation. It is also difficult to not picture a character the way we want them because our imaginations run wild with ideas all of the time. You can't stop our imagination! -
I know that I am guilty of making assumptions in this book. I know that we weren't given even as much as a hair color about the characters, but I assumed them to all be African American. Not in a racist way, mind you, but simply because the American Girl Doll I wanted when I was little was named Addie, and she was African American (it's a silly reason, I know... for the record, I never did get that American Girl doll from Santa.)
I think Gass doesn't want us inferring things like this, so he makes the rule that we shouldn't infer at all. But, part of me feels that Faulkner wrote this novel vaguely for exactly that purpose - so we would infer things. Dewey Dell's pregnancy, for example, was pretty much spelled out for us, but never exactly stated. That we can infer, though. I'm not sure about the situation in the basement with the doctor. There is a lot of evidence, but I don't know if it's exactly fool-proof, and maybe we shouldn't be making that assumption at all because we don't get enough information. -
Gass's advice like any others has to be taken in reference to the situation at hand. Certainly imaging a character's appearance is not overly important in this novel, but it may be in another, just like inferring Dewey Dell's pregnancy, Jewel's illegitimacy, and Dewey Dell's rape would be important parts of As I Lay Dying. By Faulkner basically directly saying that these occurred, it isn't so much inferring though as it is just filling in the gaps, gaps that were Faulkner's intent to be filled. Here I think is where Gass comes in. He doesn't want to us imagine events that did not occur or try to create a history for the character that doesn't exist. He doesn't want us to go the route of fan fiction. Following Faulkner's intent, though, it is necessary that we catch on to what he is inferring to appreciate all the nuances of As I Lay Dying. When we understand that Jewel was the love child of Addie and the minister, his height is explained, Addie's love for him is explained, and many other things. If you didn't catch that Dewey Dell was pregnant in the beginning, her entire reason behind the trip to Jefferson and ensuing rape would also escape you. There is a difference between understanding what the author has not directly stated and creating new material all your own that is not based on the written word. -
I thought you phrased that nicely, DGr, that in some cases the author is almost begging us to make our own inferences. It's true. We have to draw conclusions and make assumptions that the author leaves out, if it's necessary to our grasp on the novel, as long as it doesn't deter us from the true message of the book. However, I think there's a reason why Faulkner did not give physical descriptions right off the bat like many other authors do. Faulkner did not want us to get caught up with images. We are so accustomed to identifying people by a face. One of the very first things that we do when we meet a new person is put a place in our brain for a name and a matching face. Faulkner probably did not want us to do that. My feeling is that he wanted us to match a name with a certain mindset and opinion, what they contributed to Addie's and the family's story, which for this novel's purposes was more important. -
It would be unrealistic to say that you can't fill in the gaps in the story, and I don't know anyone who doesn't get some kind of mental picture of what is going on in a book, even if some of the information is missing and has to be filled in. I think that is what makes every book a different experience for different people. I think that Faulkner did want us to focus more on the characters, and the way that they interacted with, and thought about each other, and this may be why sometimes the detail seems to be lacking, because he wants us to know that the importance of the book is not in the details. When a book tells me all about someone or something I feel like the little things are of some importance, and look really closely at them to find out what the importance is. Because the little details weren't extreamly important I think that Faulkner left them up to our own imagination to fill them in. -